The case of Assyrian King Sennacherib’s invasion into Hezekiah’s Judah in 701 BC is one of the best-documented and most controversial events in the Bible and in archaeology.

In last week’s post, Dr. Craig C. Broyles discussed the Greek Historian Herodotus’ account of Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah and the prophetic perspectives of Isaiah and Micah. This built upon his post on May 19th of the record of the events in 2 Kgs 18–19 and Sennacherib’s own account in a prism discovered in his palace. In this post, Dr. Broyles tells us how we should respond to these diverse, discrepant accounts, and reflects on what these events tell us about the prophetic word of God.

Second Kings 18:7 (NRSV) appears to commend Hezekiah’s decision to join the rebellion (“The Lord was with him; wherever he went, he prospered. He rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him”). The prophet Isaiah, however, condemns Jerusalem’s rulers for forming a coalition of rebellion with Egypt. Isaiah promotes the idea that Yahweh will “protect Jerusalem,” and cause “the Assyrian [to] fall by a sword, not of mortals” (Isa 31:5, 8; also see 30:31). Even though Judah has “deeply betrayed” the Lord, Isaiah promises their rescue (Isa 31:5–6). Meanwhile, Micah laments Sennacherib’s invasion as divine judgment (Mic 1:12).

How should we respond to this diversity and these discrepancies? Should we call them contradictions and dismiss the Bible as merely a human document? Or should we assert more forcefully that the Bible is God’s Word and concede that the resolution is simply unknown to us? First, we must not get defensive but rather take courage. If we have the conviction that the Bible is the word of God then we should believe that it is fully trustworthy—when properly interpreted—and can endure any legitimate scrutiny. Second, we should endeavor to be “noble-minded” like the Jews in Berea who were “examining the Scriptures daily” (Acts 17:11 NASB).

To come to terms with the perspective of 2 Kings we must examine the basis of the narrator’s claims more closely.

1. Scholars often call the writer of 2 Kings the Deuteronomistic Historian because his judgments of the kings of Israel and Judah are based on the book of Deuteronomy, especially chapter 12. His assessment that Hezekiah “did what was right in the sight of the Lord” is because he “broke down the pillars, and cut down the sacred pole” (2 Kgs 18:3–4; compare 18:22), just as prescribed in Deut 12:3.

2. His comment that Hezekiah “rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him” (2 Kgs 18:7) is contrasted with the failure of his predecessor, King Ahaz, who constructed a pagan altar for the Jerusalem temple in deference to “the king of Assyria” (2 Kgs 16:10–18). From this Deuteronomic perspective, resistance to pagan idolatry becomes fused with independence from a foreign, pagan state.

3. The claim that Hezekiah “prospered” (literally, “succeeded;” 2 Kgs 18:7), even when “he rebelled against the king of Assyria,” must be seen in comparison to the king of northern Israel, Hoshea, who likewise rebelled. In Hoshea’s case, “the king of Assyria carried the Israelites away to Assyria” (2 Kgs 18:11); whereas, in Hezekiah’s case, his refusal to serve under Assyrian control and insistence on maintaining his throne and most of his people, was followed by the Assyrian repulsion from Jerusalem. This insertion of 18:9–12, which is repetition from 17:5–8, into the story of Hezekiah confirms this interpretation.

Hezekiah’s “success” is mitigated just a verse later: “In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah, King Sennacherib of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities of Judah and captured them” (2 Kgs 18:13 NRSV). Hezekiah then apologizes to the Assyrian king and agrees to pay whatever tribute is imposed, including “silver” and “gold” from “the temple of the Lord” (2 Kgs 18:14–15). In addition, both Hezekiah himself (2 Kgs 19:4) and Isaiah (2 Kgs 19:30–31) refer to “the surviving remnant of the house of Judah.” Although the storyline in 2 Kings precedes the miraculous rescue of Jerusalem in center stage (2 Kgs 18:17–19:37), 2 Kgs 18:13–16 are important verses that might go overlooked. But other passages elsewhere in the Bible, namely Micah’s lament for these destroyed cities of Judah, make sure that the readers of the Bible do not forget those outlying towns that were not as fortunate as the capital city of Jerusalem (Mic 1:1–16). Sennacherib’s Prism claims that he had taken captive “200,150 people” and had “diminished his land.” And the wall relief of the siege of Lachish in Sennacherib’s palace in Nineveh graphically illustrates the cruel terror with which the Assyrians repay their rebels, as does the archaeology of Lachish itself.

Theological Reflections on Hezekiah’s Decisions

Our “examining of the Scriptures” brings into sharp relief an essential point for responsible interpretation of the Bible. If we merely quote chapter and verse, presuming this represents God’s entire perspective on any given issue, then we misrepresent the Word of God which is often presented through many words, as well as diverse passages in the Holy Scriptures.

The events surrounding Hezekiah’s rebellion against the Assyrian Empire and Sennacherib’s invasion testify powerfully to the consequences of ignoring Yahweh’s prophetic word, on the one hand, and to Yahweh’s faithfulness during the eleventh hour, on the other hand. We can well imagine Hezekiah’s dilemma. On the one side he has his political and military advisers, and on the other, the prophet Isaiah. At stake are the lives and territory of the kingdom of Judah. Trusting in Yahweh may seem the obvious choice while reading the Bible, but if we were living in the midst of the realities and complexities of a vassal state rebelling against a ruthless empire—with its siege machines and threats of mass burials—we too may have made the decisions Hezekiah did. As today, the decision that befits faith and common-sense wisdom may not be clear.

The case of Assyrian King Sennacherib’s invasion into Hezekiah’s Judah in 701 BC is one of the best-documented and most controversial events in the Bible and in archaeology.

In last week’s post, Dr. Craig C. Broyles discussed the differences between how Sennacherib’s invation of Judah is recorded in 2 Kgs 18-19 and Sennacherib’s own account. In this post, Dr. Broyles analyzes the Greek Historian Herodotus’ third-party account of Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah (2 Kgs 18–19), as well as Isaiah and Micah’s prophetic perspectives on the event.

A Historian’s Voice from Greece: Herodotus’ Histories

Herodotus was a Greek historian of the fifth century BC. Regarding his narrative about Sennacherib, he claims to “have relied on the accounts given … by the Egyptians.” Both Isaiah’s prophecy and the narrative of 2 Kings are in agreement that what causes Sennacherib to “turn” and withdraw from Jerusalem is a “report” that Egyptian forces were approaching him (2 Kgs 19:6–9a; compare, 2 Kgs 19:28, 33). The Assyrian account and this one from Herodotus agree that during Sennacherib’s campaign he engaged in battle with Egypt. Both the Bible and Herodotus’ Egyptian source concur that the Assyrians suffered a dramatic and unexpected setback, so that “they abandoned their position and suffered severe losses during their retreat” (Herodotus). The Bible attributes this setback to “the angel of the Lord” (2 Kgs 19:35), Herodotus to “thousands of field-mice.” While acknowledging the ultimate agent of this reversal, it is tempting to think of some sort of plague befalling Sennacherib’s troops as its immediate cause. Though based only on circumstantial evidence, such an event would also help us to fill in the apparent gaps in Sennacherib’s own account, wherein his failure to take Jerusalem and depose Hezekiah is inconsistent with his treatment of other rebels.

Herodotus on the Egyptians and Sennacherib: From Herodotus, Histories 2.141

Next on the throne after Anysis was Sethos, the High priest of Hephaestus. He is said to have neglected the warrior class of the Egyptians and to have treated them with contempt, as if he had been unlikely to need their services. He offended them in various ways, not least by depriving them of the twelve acres of land which each of them had held by special privilege under previous kings. As a result, when Egypt was invaded by Sennacherib, the king of Arabia and Assyria, with a great army, not one of them was willing to fight. The situation was grave; not knowing what else to do, the priest-king entered the shrine and, before the image of the god, complained bitterly of the peril which threatened him. In the midst of his lamentations he fell asleep, and dreamt that the god stood by him and urged him not to lose heart; for if he marched boldly out to meet the Arabian army, he would come to no harm, as the god himself would send him helpers. By this dream the king’s confidence was restored; and with such men as were willing to follow him—not a single one of the warrior class, but a mixed company of shopkeepers, artisans, and market-people—he marched to Pelusium, which guards the approaches to Egypt, and there took up his position. As he lay here facing the Assyrians, thousands of field-mice swarmed over them during the night, and ate their quivers, their bowstrings, and the leather handles of their shields, so that on the following day, having no arms to fight with, they abandoned their position and suffered severe losses during their retreat. There is still a stone statue of Sethos in the temple of Hephaestus; the figure is represented with a mouse in its hand, and the inscription: “Look upon me and learn reverence.” Up to this point I have relied on the accounts given me by the Egyptians and their priests.

—Translation from Herodotus, The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt (Penguin Books, 1954).

A Prophetic Voice from Jerusalem: Isaiah

Engraving by Gustave Dore, 1870. Photo by D. Walker.

The accounts surrounding Hezekiah’s rebellion against the Assyrian Empire and Sennacherib’s invasion powerfully testify to the consequences of ignoring Yahweh’s prophetic Word, as well as to Yahweh’s faithfulness in the eleventh hour. 2 Kings 19:6–7 and 19:20–34 (and the parallel accounts in Isa 37:6–7 and 37:21–35) contain some of Isaiah’s prophetic oracles embedded in a narrative context, datable to the crisis of Sennacherib’s invasion, which testify to this.

Essential to Hezekiah’s attempt to “rebel” against “Assyria” is his prior coalition with “Egypt,” as noted in the Assyrian official’s speech in the historical narrative of 2 Kgs 18:19–24. Thus, we should search for passages in Isa 1–39 which use both the proper nouns “Assyria” and “Egypt.” When we do, we discover a key oracle in Isa 31 (also see Isa 30:1–7).

Isaiah on Hezekiah and the Assyrian King

When we turn to Isaiah’s datable oracles in 2 Kgs 19 (compare Isa 37) we step chronologically forward into the midst of the crisis.

2 Kings 19:6-7 NRSV (compare, Isaiah 37:6–7):

“Isaiah said to them [the servants of king Hezekiah], “Say to your master, ‘Thus says the Lord: Do not be afraid because of the words that you have heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have reviled me. 7 I myself will put a spirit in him, so that he shall hear a rumor and return to his own land; I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.’”

2 Kings 19:22, 32–34 NRSV (compare, Isaiah 37:23, 33–35):

“Whom have you mocked and reviled? Against whom have you raised your voice and haughtily lifted your eyes? Against the Holy One of Israel! …” 32Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city, shoot an arrow there, come before it with a shield, or cast up a siege ramp against it. 33By the way that he came, by the same he shall return; he shall not come into this city, says the Lord. 34For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David.”

The interests of this oracle closely match those of the narrative in 2 Kgs 18–19:

1. The downfall of Assyria

2. The rescue of Jerusalem

3. A military coalition with Egypt

Our searching of the Scriptures thus yields a significant discovery: we have gained a decidedly different perspective on King Hezekiah from his portrayal in 2 Kings. There the general assessment is that “he did what was right in the sight of the Lord” (2 Kgs 18:3), but here he is among those who “have deeply betrayed” the Lord by seeking to ensure national security by means of a military alliance, rather than by trusting in the Lord.

In several other oracles collected in Isa 28-33 the prophet pronounces “the word of the Lord” that soundly condemns “the rulers of this people in Jerusalem” (including Hezekiah, though not named) for engaging in a “treaty” of alliance with “Egypt” (Isa 28:14–15; 38:8). A similar condemnation is found in Isa 22:8–11: while Jerusalem “collected the waters of the lower pool,” “made a reservoir,” and “broke down the houses to fortify the wall,” they “did not look to” the Lord. These oracles appear to precede Sennacherib’s actual invasion and the datable oracles of Isaiah contained in 2 Kgs 18–19 and Isa 36–37, which are pronounced in the midst of the crisis. The prophet’s reasons for condemning attempts at forming a “rebel coalition” are clear.

1. Rebellion against the powerful Assyrian empire is impractical: “Egypt’s help is worthless” (Isa 30:7).

2. The rulers of Jerusalem have misguided theological priorities: they act “without asking for my counsel” (Isa 30:2), and they “do not look to the Holy One of Israel” (Isa 31:1).

3. They lack theological vision: “the Lord of hosts will come down to fight upon Mt. Zion and … protect Jerusalem … The Assyrian shall fall by a sword, not of mortals” (Isa 31:4–5, 8).

Isaiah on Making Allies with Egypt

Isaiah 31:1–8 NRSV

“‘Alas for those who go down to Egypt for help and who rely on horses, who trust in chariots because they are many and in horsemen because they are very strong, but do not look to the Holy One of Israel or consult the Lord! … 3The Egyptians are human, and not God; their horses are flesh, and not spirit. When the Lord stretches out his hand, the helper will stumble, and the one helped will fall, and they will all perish together. … 5the Lord of hosts will protect Jerusalem; he will protect and deliver it, he will spare and rescue it.’ 6Turn back to him whom you have deeply betrayed, O people of Israel. … 7Then the Assyrian shall fall by a sword, not of mortals.”¹

By searching the Scriptures, and by comparing Scripture with Scripture, we learn something remarkable. Although Isaiah had staunchly opposed Jerusalem’s political maneuvers to ally with Egypt, he now—in the eleventh hour—pronounces an oracle for Jerusalem’s rescue! While God may have His ideal will that His people trust Him to deal with Assyria in His own way and in His own time, He does not abandon them when they choose a political expedient. In spite of their distrust, He comes to their rescue.

A Prophetic Voice from an Outlying Town: Micah

Micah’s account of this story is quite different from Isaiah’s. In Mic 1:8–16, the prophet laments the devastation that has come to twelve cities of Judah, several of which lie in the Shephelah region, including his own hometown of Moresheth (Mic 1:1). While the historical context is not specified, the echoes of Sennacherib’s invasion are suggestive. It is apparent for several of the cities that a “conqueror” (literally, a “dispossessor”) has overrun them, giving reason for “lamentation” and “wailing.” But the reference that “disaster has come down … to the gate of Jerusalem” implies that the capital has only suffered a blockade. The closing words, “for they [i.e., the inhabitants of these cities] have gone from you into exile,” make perfect sense in light of Sennacherib’s own claims: “I took out 200,150 people … His cities which I had despoiled I cut off from his land and gave them to Mitinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron and Ṣilli-bel, king of Gaza, and thus diminished his land.”

What is particularly striking is Micah’s theological perspective on these events: “disaster has come down from the Lord.” He regards Sennacherib’s invasion as divine judgment! His theological viewpoint is as different from Isaiah’s (where Sennacherib is portrayed as an arrogant mocker of the Lord; e.g., 2 Kgs 19:22–23, 27–28) as is his social location. Perhaps this is because Isaiah’s hometown is spared during the invasion, but Micah’s is not.

Some Reflections on the Perspectives

To appreciate God’s panoramic perspective of people and events we must view them through the variety of human perspectives in the Bible. The narrator in 2 Kings approves of Hezekiah’s rebellion against the Assyrian empire and portrays its climax as Jerusalem’s deliverance. Isaiah of Jerusalem strongly condemns his political maneuvers and instead promotes faith in Yahweh. In the end, he prophesies Jerusalem’s deliverance. The prophet Micah of Moresheth, whose hometown lies near Lachish and shared its captive fate, laments Sennacherib’s devastation of Judah and perceives in it that “disaster has come down from the Lord.”

God has His “ideal will” (as exemplified in Isaiah’s initial oracles in Isa 28–33), which offers much promise and a better way. God’s people may fall short of His “ideal will” and forfeit the blessings associated with it. But even so, God does not simply leave them to their own devices. He also has his “concessionary will,” which offers a measure of blessing and may even save them from some of the consequences of their wrong decisions (as exemplified in Isaiah’s later oracles in 2 Kgs 19; compare, Isa 37).

Next Week: In God’s Word through Multiple Voices, Part 3

-How we should respond to these diverse, discrepant accounts.

-Conclusions about what these events tell us about the prophetic word of God.

The Bible has been the world’s bestseller not only because it discloses God and gives meaning to our lives, but also because it’s good reading. One of the greatest personal discoveries for readers of the Bible is to step beyond favorite verses and stories and start comparing Scripture with Scripture. To gain God’s panoramic perspective on any biblical event or issue, we must search the Scriptures to assemble the various historical snapshots. In doing so, we appreciate the complexity of biblical events and begin to understand God’s role in them—an intricacy that matches our experience in the 21st-century.

How can we identify God’s activity in our lives? If things go in our favor, do they indicate God’s favor? If life brings us hardships, do they indicate His judgment or discipline? Or, should we trace these circumstances to human choices? God’s revelation does not give us pat answers. Instead, this canonical anthology reflects a complexity of perspectives on divine intervention, which allows us to appreciate God’s panoramic perspective.

The invasion of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, into Hezekiah’s Judah in 701 BC serves as a wonderful illustration of this web of perspectives. The story of King Hezekiah, the prophet Isaiah, and the Assyrian King Sennacherib, should be put on Hollywood’s big-screen, because it is full of drama, intrigue, big battle scenes, and surprising twists of plot.

This crisis is one of the best-documented and most controversial events in the Bible and in archaeology.

A Narrator’s Voice from the Bible: 2 Kings 18–19

Between 735 and 733 BC, a coalition from Damascus and northern Israel threatened to invade Judah (2 Kgs 16:5–18). Judah’s King Ahaz responded by appealing for help from the king of Assyria, Tiglath-pileser iii. In doing so, he made Judah a vassal to Assyria. Shortly thereafter when the kingdom of northern Israel attempted rebellion against the Assyrian Empire, “the king of Assyria invaded all the land and … captured Samaria and carried the Israelites away to Assyria” (2 Kgs 17:5–6; 722 BC). The rebellion had failed, but when the Assyrian king Sargon II died in battle in 705 BC, a widespread revolt again erupted in the empire. Among the insurgents was Hezekiah, king of Judah: “He rebelled against the king of Assyria and would not serve him” (2 Kgs 18:7).

Hezekiah “saw that there were many breaches in the city of David and . . . counted the houses of Jerusalem, and . . . broke down the houses to fortify the wall” (Isa 22:10). The archaeology of Jerusalem confirms this biblical claim. “When Hezekiah saw that Sennacherib [the Assyrian successor to Sargon II] had come and intended to fight against Jerusalem . . . Hezekiah set to work resolutely and built up the entire wall that was broken down, and raised towers on it, and outside it he built another wall” (2 Chr 32:2, 5). Hezekiah also “closed the upper outlet of the waters of Gihon and directed them down to the west side of the city of David,” so that the people fortified in Jerusalem could have enough water to get them through the battle (2 Chr 32:3–4; compare 2 Kgs 20:20). This is a reference to “Hezekiah’s Tunnel”—a remarkable piece of engineering that channeled water from the Gihon Spring to within the city walls.

Both the Bible and Assyrian records agree that in 701 BC Sennacherib marched west to subdue the rebel alliance, which included the Phoenician city of Sidon, the Philistine cities of Ashkelon and Ekron, and the kingdom of Judah. “In the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah, King Sennacherib of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities of Judah and captured them (2 Kgs 18:13). As a result, Hezekiah apologizes to Sennacherib: “I have done wrong (literally, I have sinned); withdraw from me; whatever you impose on me I will bear” (2 Kgs 18:14). He eventually pays the demanded tribute, but Sennacherib does not stop here. The full punishment for rebellion against Assyria (2 Kgs 18:7, 20) would mean the removal of Hezekiah from his throne and the deportation of Jerusalem’s citizens from their land (2 Kgs 18:31–32; 19:13). Hezekiah prays (2 Kgs 19:14–19), and Isaiah prophesies that Sennacherib and his army will withdraw and return to their own land (2 Kgs 19:6–7, 32–34). Sennacherib and his army are decimated. The Bible attributes this to “the angel of the Lord” (2 Kgs 19:35). Twenty years later, Sennacherib was assassinated by his son, Adrammelech (19:35–37; 681 BC), an event confirmed by Assyrian records (Context of Scripture 3.95).

Sennacherib on Hezekiah: From Sennacherib’s Prism

“The officials, the nobles, and the people of Ekron who had thrown Padi, their king, (who was) under oath and obligation to Assyria, into iron fetters and handed him over in a hostile manner to Hezekiah, the Judean, took fright because of the offense they had committed. The kings of Egypt, (and) the bowmen, chariot corps and cavalry of the kings of Ethiopia assembled a countless force and came to their (i.e. the Ekronites’) aid. In the plain of Eltekeh, they drew up their ranks against me and sharpened their weapons. Trusting in the god Ashur, my lord, I fought with them and inflicted a defeat upon them. The Egyptian charioteers and princes, together with the charioteers of the Ethiopians, I personally took alive in the midst of the battle. I besieged and conquered Eltekeh and Timnah and carried off their spoil. I advanced to Ekron and slew its officials and nobles who had stirred up rebellion and hung their bodies on watchtowers all about the city. The citizens who committed sinful acts I counted as spoil, and I ordered the release of the rest of them, who had not sinned. I freed Padi, their king, from Jerusalem and set him on the throne as king over them and imposed tribute for my lordship over him.

As for Hezekiah, the Judean, I besieged forty-six of his fortified walled cities and surrounding smaller towns, which were without number. Using packed-down ramps and applying battering rams, infantry attacks by mines, breeches, and siege machines, I conquered (them). I took out 200,150 people, young and old, male and female, horses, mules, donkeys, camels, cattle, and sheep, without number, and counted them as spoil. He himself, I locked up within Jerusalem, his royal city, like a bird in a cage. I surrounded him with earthworks, and made it unthinkable for him to exit by the city gate. His cities which I had despoiled I cut off from his land and gave them to Mitinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron and Silli-bel, king of Gaza, and thus diminished his land. I imposed dues and gifts for my lordship upon him, in addition to the former tribute, their yearly payment.

He, Hezekiah, was overwhelmed by the awesome splendor of my lordship, and he sent me after my departure to Nineveh, my royal city, his elite troops (and) his best soldiers, which he had brought in as reinforcements to strengthen Jerusalem, with 30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver …. He (also) dispatched his messenger to deliver the tribute and to do obeisance.”

A Narrator’s Voice from Assyria: Sennacherib’s Prism

In many regards, the Assyrian accounts confirm the biblical accounts. Sennacherib’s Prism is narrated topically, not chronologically. In the climax, Sennacherib makes this claim regarding Hezekiah: “He himself, I locked up within Jerusalem, his royal city, like a bird in a cage.” The claims and literary style of the Assyrian records are similar to those in 2 Kgs 18:13–14.

While the biblical and Assyrian accounts agree in many details, Sennacherib casts a different spin on the events. Not surprisingly, Sennacherib attributes unqualified victory to himself. How should we respond to these seemingly contradictory claims of who won and who lost? Should we simply claim that the Bible is God’s Word and therefore the more trustworthy source? That is not enough. If we claim that the God of the Bible acts in human history and experience, then those acts should be verifiable on historical grounds, insofar as data is available. Before we draw any conclusions, we must examine the rest of the evidence.

Some Reflections on the Narrators’ Perspectives

Closer analysis of the Assyrian accounts reveals a pattern in Sennacherib’s treatment of rebellious kings:

They are deposed (and sometimes humiliated).

They are replaced.

Tribute is imposed.

Both the biblical and Assyrian accounts agree that Jerusalem, the capital of the rebellious vassals, is not taken, nor is Hezekiah deposed. Hezekiah pays tribute to Assyria, but it is not delivered personally. The tribute is dispatched by a messenger after Sennacherib’s return to Nineveh. These inconsistencies suggest there is something Sennacherib is not telling us.*

While Hezekiah and the people of Judah were in some measure faithful to the Lord, they also trusted in their own resources, much to the detriment of their faith in Lord. They suffered severe consequences as a result, but in the end, the Lord proved Himself faithful by delivering his holy city from human rage.

Studying the Bible is an adventure, which means it is exciting, but it also means it takes courage. When we defer to the Bible, we deliberately allow it to lead and guide us on a journey we may never have anticipated.

*What Sennacherib is not telling us will be discussed in part two of this article.

Next Week: In God’s Word through Multiple Voices, Part 2

-The Greek historian, Herodotus, presents us with a third-party account.

-Both Isaiah, whose city of Jerusalem is delivered, and Micah, whose hometown in the countryside is not, present two prophetic perspectives.

Cyril of Alexandria (378–444 AD) was the Patriarch of Alexandria and part of several major church councils, including the First Council of Ephesus in 431 AD. Cyril believed that God, through His incarnation of Christ, spread His divine power to all of humanity. Cyril’s belief in the “power” of the incarnation is explicit in his interpretation of the woman who was healed after touching Jesus’ garment (Luke 8:43–48).

Cyril of Alexandria on Luke 8:43–48

“When [the woman] touched [Jesus], she was healed immediately and without delay. ‘For I know,’ [Jesus] said, ‘that power has gone out from me.’ [The power] transcends our order, or probably that even of the angels, to send out any power of their own nature, as something that is of themselves. Such an act is an attribute appropriate only to the nature that is above everything and supreme. Every created being God endows with power, whether of healing or something similar, [it] does not possess [power] of itself but as a thing given [to] it by God. All things are given and worked in the creature, and it can do nothing of itself. As God, [Jesus] said, ‘I know that power has gone forth from me.’ ”*

The Passage Cyril References: Luke 8:43–48 (NIV)

“And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years, but no one could heal her. She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped. ‘Who touched me?’ Jesus asked. When they all denied it, Peter said, ‘Master, the people are crowding and pressing against you.’ But Jesus said, ‘Someone touched me; I know that power has gone out from me.’ Then the woman, seeing that she could not go unnoticed, came trembling and fell at his feet. In the presence of all the people, she told why she had touched him and how she had been instantly healed. Then he said to her, ‘Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace.’ ”

Jews and Christians throughout the centuries have produced bibles that vary in content and organization.

Protestant Reformers like Martin Luther doubted the canonicity* of the Apocrypha*, but when Luther prepared his translation of the Bible into German, he did not remove the Apocrypha; he simply moved those books to an appendix. This tradition continues in many European bibles.

The English were the first group of people to remove the Apocrypha altogether. In 1599, an edition of the Geneva Bible was published without the Apocrypha. In 1615, during the reign of King James the First, George Abbot, the Archbishop of Canterbury, declared the penalty for printing a Bible without the Apocrypha to be a year in prison! But over the next three centuries the growing influence of Puritans and Presbyterians over the populace, the government, and the British and Foreign Bible Society led to a strong tradition of printing bibles containing only 66 books.

The situation today reflects this bifurcation. The bibles used by many European Protestants, as well as the Anglican Church, still include the Apocrypha. Most other English-speaking Protestant churches have bibles without the Apocrypha.

Apocrypha:Jerome, the translator of the early Latin Bible, maintained a distinction between those books he considered canonical and the non-canonical books that should be read for the edification of the church. With some modification, this list of edifying books is sometimes called the “Apocrypha.” Other theologians, such as the influential Augustine, did not maintain this distinction, and were more inclusive in their canon lists.

Canon: (kanōn; κανών)comes from the Greek word for “reed” or “rod,” used as a straight edge or ruler for measurement. In biblical studies, when we talk about a canon, we mean that list of books that a community considers both authoritative and inspired. Canonical books form the standard against which other writings, doctrines and practices are measured.

Whether you have spent countless sleepless nights pouring over Greek flash cards or can barely manage to order a gyro, you can reach beyond your English Bible to the original Greek in four easy steps.

In Luke 8:46, a desperately ill woman touches Jesus in order to be healed. Jesus then says, “Someone touched me, for I perceive that power has gone out from me” (Luke 8:46 ESV). What does the word “power” mean in the passage? What precisely went out from Jesus? To find out, we need to investigate the Greek word behind the English word “power”.

Step 1: Make the Switch to Greek and Establish a Working Definition

For those who don’t read Greek, the most effective way to make the English to Greek transition is to use a tool like the ESV English-Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament. Simply find the English word “power” in the reverse interlinear and look at the Greek word placed below it—δύναμις (dunamis).

Now that we know that the Greek word for “power,” dunamis (δύναμις), is the subject of our investigation, we need to formulate a working definition.

If you are using print books, you can use Strongest Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible for this step. The key to efficiently using this resource is to take note of the Strong’s Number allocated to the word dunamis (δύναμις) in the interlinear Bible—1411. We can use this reference number to look up the word numerically in the Greek to English Dictionary-Index to the New Testament appended to Strong’s. Here we see that dunamis (δύναμις) can refer to a literal or figurative force, specifically the ability to work miracles, or even to a miracle itself.

We can skip this step entirely in Logos Bible Software by just double-clicking a word in a reverse interlinear. When we do this, our preferred lexicon* automatically opens to dunamis (δύναμις). For me, this lexicon is A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testamentand Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG). BDAG tells me that dunamis (δύναμις) in Luke 8:46 falls under the definition of “potential for functioning in some way, power, might, strength, force, capability.” BDAG also includes a sub-definition, which reads: “specifically the power that works wonders.”

Step 2: Briefly Track the Word through the Greek World

With one of these working definitions in mind, the next step is to investigate how this definition functions in literary contexts and biblical passages.

The key to an efficient study of a Greek word is not to reinvent the wheel by personally searching through literature of various time-periods. Rather, streamline the process by consulting a resource such as the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Abridged in One Volume) (TDNT). The TDNT provides concise articles that explain how and where a word occurs in various passages and contexts.

This resource accommodates to English readers by providing a table of English keywords. When we look up the word “power” we are directed to the entry discussing dunamis (δύναμις) on page 186. This entry discusses the word in Greek literature (such as Homer’s Iliad) and in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament (the Septuagint).

While dunamis (δύναμις) in Greek literature often had to do with various forces (powers) moving and governing the universe, the Greek translators of the Old Testament viewed “power” as something God himself possessed and exerted. This shift in meaning further develops in the New Testament.

Step 3: Explore the Usage of the Word in the New Testament

When looking up a particular word in the New Testament, there are two things that should be considered: frequency (how many times a word appears) and distribution (where the word appears).

We can use an interactive chart in Logos’ Exegetical Guide to determine the frequency of a word in the New Testament. Our word, dunamis (δύναμις), occurs 119 times. Although this is interesting, this statistic only provides us with a panoramic landscape. We must supplement it with details of the terrain—the context (or specific distribution) of each occurrence. We can use Logos’ concordance function or Strong’s to ascertain the predominant meanings attached to this word by the New Testament authors.

Whenever we study a word, we should focus on how it is being used in the passage we are investigating. The fact that Luke uses the word dunamis (δύναμις) fifteen times throughout his account—a frequency equaled only by Paul in 1 Corinthians—establishes that “power” is a central theme and emphasis of his Gospel.

Now that we know that “power” is a central theme in Luke’s Gospel, we need to determine how the word is used throughout the book. Each occurrence of the word can be categorized by what it describes. When we categorize the different occurrences of dunamis (δύναμις) in Luke’s Gospel, we find that it describes four things.

In the beginning of Luke’s Gospel dunamis (δύναμις) comes from the “Most High” (Luke 1:35). However, once Jesus endures a period of testing in the wilderness there is a shift. Jesus becomes “filled with the power of the Spirit” (Luke 4:14). From this point onwards, Jesus independently uses and distributes divine power, like God the Father (Luke 9:1; 10:19). Luke uses “power” to establish Jesus’ divine identity. Jesus’ “power” causes onlookers to scratch their heads and ponder the identity and message of Jesus (Luke 4:36).

Now that we have determined how Luke uses the term in general, we can return to Luke 8:46 to reassess the meaning of dunamis (δύναμις) in light of our entire investigation.

The use of “dunamis” in Luke:

-God (1:35; 4:14)

-Jesus’ heavenly authority (21:27; 22:69)

-Jesus’ miracles (10:13; 19:37)

-Jesus’ healing ministry (5:17; 6:19; 8:46)

Step 4: Revisit the Passage to Find the Meaning of the Word in Context

Judging from the usage of the term in various contexts (and specifically in Luke’s Gospel), it seems fair to conclude that this occurrence of dunamis (δύναμις) refers to the divine power contained and originated in the person of Jesus.

The purpose of Luke 8:46 is to highlight the connection between Jesus’ divinity and the actions performed in his healing ministry. Numerous times throughout Jesus’ healing ministry, divine “power” finds its source in him (Luke 5:17; 6:19; 8:46). Dunamis (δύναμις) in Luke 8:46 subtly expresses that the presence and effect of “power” in Jesus’ earthly ministry indicates his divine identity.

To Review:

The Greek writers used dunamis (δύναμις) to describe spiritual and universal “powers”. The translators of the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) used the word to describe something that originated from, and was distributed by, God. Among other usages, Luke primarily used “power” to describe something God the Father and Jesus possessed.

Notes:

*A lexicon is an in-depth dictionary about a specific corpus of writings. Because of this, lexicons can contain more lengthy and detailed entries than dictionaries.

In the Bible, justification and sanctification are solutions to long-standing problems.

JUSTIFICATION

The Problem
All people are guilty of doing wrong (sinning) against other people and against God. All are personally responsible for their sins and thus under condemnation (Rom 3:23; 6:23). Just as people who break the laws of a society are brought before a court to be tried and judged, God brings each individual before Himself to judge them.

The Solution
Is there a way to fix all that we have done wrong? God fixes our wrongs by providing Jesus Christ. Jesus’ righteousness satisfies God’s demands. His righteousness (right actions, status and sacrifice) is accredited to all who believe (Rom 3:21).

Justification Defined
The term justification means “to declare righteous.” The New Testament writers, specifically Paul, use the term in a judicial sense. Imagine God the judge, sitting on His throne, declaring to the believer, “In light of what Jesus has done on your behalf, you are (now) righteous. Things are now right between you and me. Court dismissed.”

The defendant of course would ask, “How did this happen? And what did Jesus do to make things right between God and I?” The defendant is really asking is, “What is the basis for justification?”

Jesus’ blood (Rom 5:9)—Jesus’ suffering and death made all who choose to believe in him right with God.

Jesus’ righteousness accredited to believers (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21)—Those who believe in Jesus are freely given “right status” with God, not on the basis of their own works, but on the basis of what God has done in Jesus Christ (Rom 3:28; 4:5–6; Gal 2:16).

Once wrongdoers (sinners) have placed their faith in Christ, God declares them righteous. New believers have peace with God (Rom 5:1) because all sins, past, present and future are forgiven. Once forgiven, believers are no longer subject to the judgment that was once due (Rom 8:1). The declaration of this is justification.

In summary, justification is an act of God’s grace: A guilty sinner places his or her faith in Christ and is acquitted by God. A wrongdoer is “made right” with God.

“In light of what Jesus has done on your behalf, you are (now) righteous. Things are now right between you and me. Court dismissed.”

SANCTIFICATION

The Problem
Wherever there is the presence of sin, there is conflict. Paul wrestled with this conflict in Rom 7:15–25. This passage shows us that resolving this conflict is a process. It involves God making us more “set apart” from our wrongdoings and more like Him.

For the believer, there must be a constant and ever-increasing sense that although sin remains, it is not in control. It is one thing for sin to live in the believer, but it is quite another for the believer to live in sin.

The Solution
The Holy Spirit is the continuous agent of sanctification, who works within us to subdue sinful impulses and produce fruits of righteousness, or right actions (Rom 8:13; 2 Cor 3:17–18; Gal 5:22). This process is sanctification.

Sanctification Defined
The basic meaning of sanctification is “to be set apart.” The Hebrew word (qadosh; שודק) has a basic meaning of “separation.” As a moral term, sanctification is translated as “holiness” or “purity.” The term in Greek (hagios; ἅγιος) is translated as “holy”, as in “Holy” Spirit, or “saint.” In the spiritual sense of a believer’s life, sanctification means “to be set apart for God,” or to be made more holy through conforming to the image of His Son.

Summary
Sanctification is a work of God’s grace. The whole person is enabled to die to sin and live according to God’s will. Justification occurs at the moment of salvation, whereas sanctification is a process. When our lives are over, we will enter into God’s presence glorified, free from the presence and power of sin—already justified, fully sanctified.

In the spiritual sense of a believer’s life, sanctification means “to be set apart for God.”

Most of us have read John 5:1–9, the story of the blind, paralyzed man at the pool of Bethesda, many times, but I’ll bet there’s something that escaped your attention.

“Some time later, Jesus went up to Jerusalem for a feast of the Jews. 2 Now there is in Jerusalem near the Sheep Gate a pool, which in Aramaic is called Bethesda and which is surrounded by five covered colonnades. 3 Here a great number of disabled people used to lie—the blind, the lame, the paralyzed. 5 One who was there had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. 6 When Jesus saw him lying there and learned that he had been in this condition for a long time, he asked him, ‘Do you want to get well?’ 7 ‘Sir,’ the invalid replied, ‘I have no one to help me into the pool when the water is stirred. While I am trying to get in, someone else goes down ahead of me.’ 8 Then Jesus said to him, ‘Get up! Pick up your mat and walk.’ 9 At once the man was cured; he picked up his mat and walked.” (John 5:1–9, NIV).

If you read closely you’ll notice that verse 4 is missing! Start at verse one and count out loud: 1, 2, 3 … 5?

In case your Bible version doesn’t have the verse, the omitted words read: “for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted” (NASB).

The verse is not just missing in the NIV; the situation is the same in the ESV, NRSV, CEV, NLT, and the net Bible. If you use the NASB or NCV you will see the verse, but it’s been placed inside brackets, whereas the KJV and the NKJV contain verse 4 without any notation or demarcation. So what’s going on here? Who took John 5:4 out of the Bible?

Who took verse 4 out of the Bible?

If you’re using a study Bible that doesn’t have verse 4, you will likely see a note at the end of verse 3, or the beginning of verse 5, explaining why it isn’t there. This is a textbook case of a disagreement between manuscripts of the Greek New Testament.

What would be John 5:4 (the missing material that begins in verse 3) is not found in any of the earliest and most accurate manuscripts of the Gospel of John. Scholars who make a career of comparing manuscripts (“textual critics” and “paleographers”) have discovered that in roughly two dozen manuscripts scribes put asterisk marks at the verse to warn the next scribe who would copy the manuscript that the verse was likely not original. To top it all off, four of the last five Greek words of what would be John 5:4 aren’t found anywhere else in John’s writings. This suggests that John 5:4 does not belong in the New Testament, which explains why many modern Bible translations have omitted it.

After 1900, translators used new manuscript discoveries from the 1800s, which revealed that the verse was likely not original. This is why verse 4 is listed in the pre-1900 KJV “as is” without brackets (the NKJV followed the KJV in this regard). More recent Bible translations (omitting or retaining the verse with brackets) give us a clearer picture of what the original product of inspiration looked like.

Is John concerned with the angel?

Why would verse four have not been included in the original New Testament? It is not because of the angel in the story. The Bible has no problem with angels; they’re all over the place, doing all sorts of things. But, like today, there was a great deal of folklore and superstition about them. The idea that an angel stirred the waters at a given time during the year was one such superstition.

John 5:7 mentions the stirring of the water, but does not mention the angel. It’s likely that John knew of the belief about the waters of Bethesda, but chose to leave it out for a specific reason. Perhaps he does not wish to endorse that an angel was stirring the water. By excluding the popular belief about the angel, John focuses his readers on the healer who was indeed present—Jesus.

There are some lessons for us all in “the case of the missing verse.” First, we need to train ourselves to read the Bible closely. If we missed something like the normal order of numbering in John 5, what else are we overlooking? Second, it pays to compare Bible versions. Even scholars who read Greek and Hebrew actively compare manuscript traditions. The work of another scribe (or Bible translator) can often direct our attention to something important. Third, we need to be sure the content of our preaching and teaching has a secure footing in the text. God moved people to spend their lives transmitting the biblical text; the least we can do is pay close attention.

When I gave birth to my first child nearly eight years ago, I was totally unprepared for the immense change she would bring to my life. Sure, I knew about 2 AM feedings, sleepless nights and endless piles of laundry. I was aware a newborn would be dependent on me and that this job would consume me like no other occupation. However, I could never have prepared for how emotionally and spiritually consuming this job would be. I had no idea that a child could take such possession of your heart.

At seven and three my daughters no longer require the constant care that they did just a few years ago. Yet the mental and emotional energy my job as a mother requires often leaves me exhausted, with very little to offer my husband and friends. Meanwhile, I imagine God watching in the distance, waiting for me to come and sit with Him, only to be addressed by my half-conscious form as I fall into bed, thanking Him for His blessings—for getting us through another day.

Overwhelmed? You’re not alone.

I’ve spent a great deal of mental energy in my mothering years trying to figure out ways to enhance my time alone with God. I’ve tried it all—rising early, staying up late, utilizing naptime and even, horror of horrors, putting on a TV show while I sneak away for devotional time. My children, however, seem to have some internal alarm that goes off as soon as I open my Bible and before you know it, someone’s been hurt, had a nightmare or needs my attention right now (think: potty training). In the rare times that I haven’t been interrupted, I find my thoughts wandering to the dentist appointment that needs to be cancelled, the poor grade on the report card or the sweet exchange I witnessed between my daughter and her Daddy earlier that day. Before I started down the road of motherhood I could pore over passages of the Bible and mull them over for hours on end. I prided myself on my analytical abilities and my love of reading. These days I consider it an accomplishment if my attention span holds out until the end of a paragraph.

So, I often conclude my devotional time feeling frustration and guilt, resolving to try harder next time. When I think of other young mothers with many more children and much more on their plates who manage to study the Bible and spend quality time with God, I wonder, is there something wrong with me? Maybe with a little more perseverance or a more engaging topic I’ll have more success. I resolve to find the right study, the right time, the right method—I will leave no stone unturned until I discover it. And if I don’t, my youngest will be off to college in a mere fifteen years. Will it be too late for me to begin then?

With Jesus, all things are possible

Lately, God has been challenging me to look at the process a little differently. He keeps drawing me back to the theme of loaves and fish (Matt 14:14–21). Jesus himself was faced with a seemingly insurmountable task. There he was in a remote place with a large crowd and dinnertime was quickly approaching. His disciples surveyed the crowd and all they could find was a boy with five loaves and two fish. Under no circumstances would that be enough. They advised him to do the only logical thing, send the people away to find some food. Instead, Jesus took a child’s paltry offering and fed the five thousand, collecting twelve baskets of leftovers. Not just enough, more than enough.

I believe in a God who specializes in making something out of nothing. His Word says He is “able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine according to his power that is at work within us” (Eph 3:20 NIV). I have seen this principle carried out so often in my life: my health, my finances, my human relationships. Yet, when it came to my relationship with God, I found myself believing that I would have to sustain it on my own, that somehow I had the power to do so. What I hadn’t realized was that while I thought that I’d been upholding our relationship in the past, it was God doing the work in me all along—His strength made perfect in my weakness.

So when I carve out a moment to come to Him now, I visualize myself holding a paltry offering of too little time and attention. It will never be enough. But I bring it in faith, trusting that He will multiply the little I have and provide me with enough nourishment for that moment, with some to spare.

Exploring how Christians from the past have interpreted and applied the Scriptures has been made much easier with Ancient Christian Texts, a series of neglected, ancient Christian commentaries translated into English.

The two volumes of the Incomplete Commentary on Matthew offer a translation of the ancient commentary on the book of Matthew.Written by an anonymous, 5th-century Christian, translated by James A. Kellerman, and edited by Thomas C. Oden and Gerald L. Bray, the commentary includes theological and devotional reflections on Matthew chapters 1–8, 10–13 and 19–25. This first volume covers Matthew 1–11.
This accessible translation is recommended for anyone who is curious about how some of the earliest Christians understood the Bible. Small groups and individuals might consider using both this volume and a modern commentary on Matthew as they work through the text—comparing and contrasting how ancient and modern commentators approach Scripture.